DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2021-0180701, filed on December 16th, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) submitted on June 14th, 2024; July 2nd, 2025; August 12th, 2025; October 28th, 2025; and December 29th, 2025 have been received and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Prior Art
Zhao CN111740157A (“Zhao”) **as cited in the IDS submitted October 28th, 2025
Hoffert WO2021003184A2 (“Hoffert”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao CN111740157A.
Regarding Claim 1, Zhao discloses a solid electrolyte ([0009]), comprising:
a nitrile compound including 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4-benzoquinone (DDQ) ([0009], [0014]);
a non-oxygen-containing polymer matrix including polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) (corresponding to the instantly claimed binder) ([0009]-[0011]); and
a lithium salt such as lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI) or lithium di(trifluoromethansulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI) ([0009], [0013], [0069]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the DDQ of Zhao is a solid-phase lithium dissociation material, as evidenced by Applicant’s own PG Publication paragraph [0023].
Regarding Claim 2, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 1) Zhao discloses wherein the solid-phase lithium dissociation material comprises 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4-benzoquinone (DDQ) (which meets the instantly claimed limitation of at least one selected from the group consisting of chloranil, 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4-benzoquinone (DDQ), tetracyanoethylene (TCNE), and trinitrofluorenone (TNF)) ([0009], [0014]).
Regarding Claim 4, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 1) Zhao discloses wherein the binder comprises polytetrafluoroethylene (which meets the instantly claimed limitation of at least one selected from the group consisting of styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), polytetrafluoroethylene, carboxymethylcellulose, polyacrylic acid, lithium polyacrylate and polyvinylidene fluoride) ([0009]-[0011]).
Regarding Claim 6, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 1) Zhao discloses wherein the lithium salt comprises lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium(trifluoromethansulfonyl)imide (which meets the instantly claimed limitation of at least one selected from the group consisting of lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulphonyl)imide (LiTFSI) and lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI)) ([0009], [0013], [0069]).
Regarding Claim 7, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and Zhao discloses wherein the lithium salt is contained in an amount between 10 and 30% by weight ([0009]), more specifically 12% by weight (which falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of 10 to 80% by weight), based on the total weight of the solid electrolyte (Example 5, [0069]).
Regarding Claim 8, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and Zhao discloses wherein the solid electrolyte is in a form of a solid electrolyte membrane ([0028]-[0030]).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 8, and Zhao discloses wherein the solid electrolyte membrane has a thickness of 20 µm (which falls within and therefore anticipates the instantly claimed range of 5 µm to 150 µm) ([0069]).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and Zhao discloses wherein the solid electrolyte does not comprise a polymer having ion conductivity (Example 5, [0069]).
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoffert WO2021003184A2.
Regarding Claim 1, Hoffert discloses a solid electrolyte (Abstract, [0005], entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising:
chloranil (Example 1, Page 95 lines 4-10);
a binder such as PPS (Example 1, Page 95 lines 4-10); and
a lithium salt such as LiTFSI (Example 1, Page 95 lines 4-15).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the chloranil of Hoffert is a solid-phase lithium dissociation material, as evidenced by Applicant’s own PG Publication paragraph [0023].
Regarding Claim 2, Hoffert teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 1) Hoffert discloses wherein the solid-phase lithium dissociation material comprises chloranil (which meets the instantly claimed limitation of at least one selected from the group consisting of chloranil, 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4-benzoquinone (DDQ), tetracyanoethylene (TCNE), and trinitrofluorenone (TNF)) ([0010], [0015]).
Regarding Claim 11, Hoffert teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and Hoffert discloses wherein the solid electrolyte consists of the solid-phase dissociation material chloranil, the binder PPS, and the lithium salt LiTFSI (Example 1, Page 95 lines 4-15).
Regarding Claim 12, Hoffert discloses an all solid battery (Example 1, Page 95 lines 15-20) comprising:
a cathode (positive electrode) (Page 96, lines 1-5);
an anode (negative electrode) (Page 96, lines 1-5); and
the solid electrolyte of Claim 1 (Example 1, Page 96, lines 1-5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao CN111740157A.
Regarding Claim 3, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, and Zhao discloses wherein the solid-phase lithium dissociation material is contained in an amount of 10 to 25% by weight (which overlaps the instantly claimed range of 20 to 90% by weight)1 based on the total weight of the solid electrolyte ([0009]).
1 In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhao teaches the instantly claimed solid electrolyte according to Claim 1. While Zhao does not explicitly disclose wherein the binder is contained in an amount of 3 to 40% by weight based on the total weight of the solid electrolyte, Zhao does disclose including the binder to improve the electrochemical window of the composite solid electrolyte membrane ([0028])2. And, therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the amount of binder within the solid electrolyte of Zhao, including to an amount that falls within or overlaps the instantly claimed range of 3 to 40% by weight based on the total weight of the solid electrolyte, in order to improve the electrochemical window of the composite solid electrolyte membrane, as taught by Zhao.
2 “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA MASON MELFI whose telephone number is (703)756-4652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-6pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/O.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights